this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
53 points (75.2% liked)

Public Health

1103 readers
26 users here now

For issues concerning:

🩺 This community has a broader scope so please feel free to discuss. When it may not be clear, leave a comment talking about why something is important.

Related Communities

See the pinned post in the Medical Community Hub for links and descriptions. link (!medicine@lemmy.world)

Rules

Given the inherent intersection that these topics have with politics, we encourage thoughtful discussions while also adhering to the mander.xyz instance guidelines.

Try to focus on the scientific aspects and refrain from making overly partisan or inflammatory content

Our aim is to foster a respectful environment where we can delve into the scientific foundations of these topics. Thank you!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@mander.xyz
otter@lemmy.ca
53
Inhalers drive carbon emissions equivalent to 530,000 cars each year, study shows (phys.org)
submitted 4 days ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/publichealth@mander.xyz
51 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Inhalers are the frontline treatment for asthma and COPD, but they come with a steep environmental cost, according to a new UCLA Health study—the largest to date quantifying inhaler-related emissions in the United States.

Researchers found that inhalers have generated over 2 million metric tons of carbon emissions annually over the past decade, equivalent to the emissions of roughly 530,000 gas-powered cars on the road each year.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I really dislike that argument. Because these companies are producing products that on turn get used by individuals

Oil companies aren't burning oil because it looks pretty, and coal power plants aren't burning coal because it smells so nice. Cement production isn't being used because it's fun to make liquid rocks. Sooner it later they are being used by individuals

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 5 points 4 days ago

Yes, but then they do everything from lobbying to spreading misinformation to make sure their products keep being used. When you focus on corporations, you can start implementing regulations and reform to tackle emissions at the macro scale. Want people to eat less meat? Stop subsidizing it. Want people to use less oil? Invest in renewable energy. Etc.

[–] bizarroland@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

The thing is, like, I don't expect anyone to be perfect, but we could do the equivalent of removing every single human being's carbon footprint off of the planet by regulating industry to reduce their output by 25%.

There's 57 companies that are doing 80% of the total, so you address those 57 companies and, through taxes and legislation, and regulation, get them to reduce their carbon output by 25%, and that would be the same as removing every human being from the planet.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 days ago

Those companies have many choices in the way they choose to manufacture things, and often choose the most polluting method legally available, and often try to sneak over that line a bit until they're caught